Christian eloquence has become a spectacle. That gospel sadness,
which is its soul, is no longer to be observed in it; its place is
supplied by advantages of facial expression, by inflexions of the
voice, by regularity of gesticulation, by choice of words, and by
long categories. The sacred word is no longer listened to
seriously; it is a kind of amusement, one among many; it is a game
in which there is rivalry, and in which there are those who lay
wagers.

Profane eloquence has been transferred, so to speak, from the
bar,... where it is no longer employed, to the pulpit, where it
ought not to be found.

Matches of eloquence are made at the very foot of the altar, and in
the presence of the mysteries. He who listens sits in judgment on
him who preaches, to condemn or to applaud, and is no more
converted by the discourse which he praises than by that which he
pronounces against. The orator pleases some, displeases others, and
has an understanding with all in one thing,--that as he does not
seek to render them better, so they do not think of becoming
better.

The almost cynical acerbity of the preceding is ostensibly relieved of
an obvious application to certain illustrious contemporary examples
among preachers by the following open allusion to Bossuet and
Bourdaloue:--

The Bishop of Meaux [Bossuet] and Father Bourdaloue make me think
of Demosthenes and Cicero. Both of them, masters of pulpit
eloquence, have had the fortune of great models; the one has made
bad critics, the other, bad imitators.

Here is a happy instance of La Bruyere's successful pains in redeeming a
commonplace sentiment by means of a striking form of expression; the
writer is disapproving the use of oaths in support of one's testimony:--

An honest man who says, Yes, or No, deserves to be believed; his
character swears for him.

Highly satiric in his quiet way, La Bruyere knew how to be. Witness the
following thrust at a contemporary author, not named by the satirist,
but, no doubt, recognized by the public of the time:--

He maintains that the ancients, however unequal and negligent they
may be, have fine traits; he points these out; and they are so fine
that they make his criticism readable.

How painstakingly, how self-consciously, La Bruyere did his literary
work, is evidenced by the following:--